zazen

Lots of good docs and shares to dig into here. Some updates: Canada has reinstated UNRWA funding and halted arms sales to Israel. Israeli spokesperson Eylon Levy suspened from UK: https://news.sky.com/story/israeli-spokesperson-eylon-levy-suspended-after-reports-of-row-with-foreign-office-13098754 Falling dominoes of support and patience by Israel's allies with no end in sight. Hard to see any solution with Hamas or Bibi/far right in charge. It's almost as if a solution has to be imposed externally by the US/allies. Odd that they supply arms with one hand and build a port of aid with the other.

Another 100+ page Isreal Gaza thread incoming - we had some good times in the locked one haha. We’re like a dysfunctional family at a Christmas dinner with a love hate relationship. As long we don’t get toxic to the level below: Hope everyone’s doing good.

The dead horse just got revived with this haha Though in general I prefer the term and act of discussion over debate. Debate implies a held position one side is debating for or against and is closed off to changing it when presented new information or perspectives.

@Nivsch Bro it's human to react, but inhumane to react disproportionately. A leader has responsibility to be careful with his words because they hold weight and ring in the ears of the nation. It isn't only his speech but the actions of the state following it. The world gave 5 minutes of solace to Israel and a green light to address the issue but its been 5 months now and the judgment being made world wide is that Israel has gone too far. Israel's claim that their approach is security-centric doesn't hold up. If a house or shop gets robbed and the people in it are massacred in the process, fortifying security means installing locks, cameras and security guards - security is about being defensive and not going on the offensive. Justice involves going after the violent perpetrators, not destroying, blockading and starving the entire town in pursuit of them and claiming every innocent life lost as collateral damage or a human shield. Whilst clash of values is a factor to why Israel/Palestine is a popular topic, a larger factor is the universal ethics and lessons learned from the horrors of the Holocaust that were crystallized into international law to prevent anything similar happening again or anything even on the lower end of the spectrum of Genocide such as ethnic cleansing which is a subset of it. Ideology shouldn't trump humanity. People can accept Zionism if it means statehood and safety for Jewish people but not ultra-Zionism if it means a Jewish ethno-state at the expense of indigenous people. Ultra-Zionists hijack the suffering of the Holocaust for their own ends. They nationalise and racialise Judaism and Islamists globalize Islam.

@Vrubel @Nivsch Then there’s Isaac Herzog, the Israeli president, who declared: “It is an entire nation out there that is responsible. It’s not true this rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved. It’s absolutely not true.” No demarcation between militants and civilians exists here. Yoav Gallant, the minister of defence, was a repeat offender. On 9 October, in an unashamed commitment to collective punishment, he declared Israel was imposing a “complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed,” he said. “We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.” ''It always starts with words. Genocide is largely remembered for its depraved acts, but it is incubated in language. Words can cast dark spells on a population, stirring hatred in those who otherwise see themselves as moderate, humane, normal.'' Source: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/13/israel-hamas-gaza-war-crimes Besides that, it is disrespectful to protest outside a new Holocaust museum. Holocaust memorials shouldn't just signify the crime of crimes humans are capable of and once committed, but that they also shouldn't come close to anything of the like in present day.

The reason why Israel/Palestine are so popular compared to other world conflicts (Yemen, Sudan) come down to the stakes, sacredness, story, distinctness and time. The stakes of the players involved or who could potentially get involved are higher (Iran) leading to a regional war with global ripple effects due to being in a geopolitically strategic region full of resources the world depends on (the global economy hinges upon and is sensitive to energy prices) The land is sacred to the abrahamic faiths which make up over half the world’s population. Large civilisational stories are clashing and weaving their prophecies into existence hastening their depiction of end times and return of prophets. The story resonates along lines that many people relate with historically - racism, colonialism and the oppressor/oppressed frame which is taken to an extreme extent these days ie the disdain for power or hierarchy as bad. It’s not that power or who holds it is uniquely bad but the manner of how it’s used or wielded. When distinctly different groups fight it’s more starkly visible compared to the murkiness of civil unrest which from the outside isn’t as clear and as is seen as internal conflict not to get involved in. The time the cause of the Palestinians has had to build over decades and soak into the psyche has been decades. Many global humanitarian groups, activists and journalists have established networks who’ve been covering it for a while. This inconvenient fact is overlooked by ultra Zionists as it goes against the narrative that October 7th started in a vacuum. Of course they’d rather emphasise much older times thousands of years back and make ancient claims as justification to the land. Israel is the Wests creation and America’s baby. As the West control a lot of the global narrative of course the focus will be on what’s occurring there. A point unique to Gaza is they have no where to flee and are caged into a small area where as in other places civilians can move to remote parts of their country where no conflict takes place. That this conflict is live-streamed and one of the parties involved dehumanise, mock and uploads tik toks only further infuriates the world.

Exactly. Whats all this destruction for then - are they playing whack a mole with the tunnel holes? Israel aren't invading a foreign country because they already occupied (past tense) another territory where people existed - yet if this past context is missed then everything points to October 7th as the start date of the current conflict. Even if these terrorists didn't have the context of resistance as a cause for their atrocity, does it justify collective punishment? If the unholy trifecta of Satanyahu, Ben Gvir and Smotrich dictate policies that cause Palestinians harm, deny them their right to self determination (two state), or orchestrate a attack - does that give Hamas or Palestinians the right to mow through the entire Israeli population and starve them in order to get to the culprits? Imagine then if Lebanon, Jordan and Syria blockade and don’t let any Israelis flee for their safety. They are now held captive on land where Hamas would demolish all their buildings and homes and drop dumb bombs on them in order to 'target' the evil Israeli leadership. Would this be justified? Would we expect the world to stop this massacre of the Israelis and to boycott and pressure Hamas? Would we question the millions across the world protesting this and call them dumb or Islamophobic for doing so when thats all they are able to do with the power they hold in the face of a ongoing massacre that the worlds top court has ruled as a plausible genocide? As for the hostages the Israeli leadership really care about - they rain down 2000lb dumb bombs onto a tiny strip of land where those very hostages are held. Could it be that the hostages are a smokescreen for the vested interests ulterior motives just as weapons of mass destruction were? Can these ulterior motives easily be known through the blatant language and self confession by the political class? Even the US are questioning and critiquing Israel now and admit to the death toll and use of dumb bombs. We can ask why tunnels exist in the first place. Further ask - does destroying infrastructure destroy the idea and cause of those who built it. What is there cause? If Israel aren't able to or are a hinderance to that cause (Palestinian self determination) will that cause ever die or will it exist until those people who seek liberation are cleansed from the land or subjugated under a occupational 'security' apparatus similar to what exists in the West Bank? Can you solve political problems with military solutions?

They ruled there’s a plausible case for genocide taking place (the final verdict takes years) and they listed tangible measures to be followed which Israel didn’t but instead violated mockingly via IDF members own hands. The majority of Israeli society might be moderate but the issue is with the groups that wield influence and set the country's policy and direction. Considering its relatively small population size, the extreme rhetoric coming out of Israel seems disproportionately high. When examples of such rhetoric are highlighted, accusations of cherry-picking often follow by ultra Zionists, yet if an equivalent volume of footage were shared depicting Muslims with the same extremist elements they feel fine to attribute these views to a 2 billion-strong Muslim population, branding them together. Extremist groups are a reality across all societies, including Islamic ones. The crucial factor is the extent of their influence over a country and its citizens. It's important to consider whether these radical voices have political allies who share their views, or if they are marginalized, wielding influence only within their own 'sacred' communities and places of worship. The distinction between political support and isolation can significantly affect how these groups impact broader society and policy. Article about the above Rabbi (whose school is funded by the government - should it be defunded? Should aid be cut to Israel just like UNRWA?) - https://jewschool.com/174135-174135 One of the notable Israeli historians;

Well said and good example of how UNRWA funding is being reinstated (and increased) by Canada now. Thats exactly the point of public commentary and shifting the narrative rather than have it maliciously controlled by vested interests. The damage has already been done as funding had been pulled but hopefully the return of some funders help alleviate the suffering of the Palestinians. I started my longer comment with this: ''Theirs a difference between denying atrocity and debunking amplified stories about atrocities which have been used for propaganda - to propagate and justify further atrocities.'' Meaning, false claims are used to cause untold suffering which is why they need to be checked - in the hopes that things can be de-escalated. The same should happen on false claims being made of Israel and Israelis which only deepens the hate. As Lina said, with new information we change our perspective - if Israel allows investigative bodies to verify claims and they come out to be true most people would happily accept them. The point is that in the name of 1 day of atrocity occurring, the response of 150 days of atrocities and suffering towards the Palestinians is being justified by the Israeli side (human shield, hostages). If we want to view it just by the numbers which is silly to be comparative like that but just as a thought exercise to get the point across: Could we say that the Palestinians having suffered for 150 days versus Israel having suffered for 1 day - means they are now justified to cause 150x this amount of suffering in their own self defence and revenge towards Israel? That would be 60 years of pain (almost a whole life time). Imagine how silly it would be if they justified that and said their trying to get to the Israeli government and the likes of Ben Gvir etc but they need to get through the Isreali population who they call human shields and blockade the entire population into starvation as a tactic to pressure the few extremist elites as a negotiation tactic.

Theirs a difference between denying atrocity and debunking amplified stories about atrocities which have been used for propaganda - to propagate and justify further atrocities. Nothing wrong in questioning distortions or exposing propaganda, especially with sources. Denying that any atrocities took place only delegitimises the person in denial of them - but people aren’t denying October 7th was atrocious, just the stories that have plot holes in them or lack evidence. Regarding the flour massacre “The IDF claims Israeli troops only began firing on the Palestinians because the soldiers “felt threatened” by them, which goes to show that there is no atrocity Israel could possibly commit where it wouldn’t frame itself as the victim - for they are the eternal victims.” At least a lot of Western media and institutions don’t deny atrocities taking place in Gaza due to the visible evidence - they just leave out the perpetrator committing them. All the Western elites say they are ‘concerned’ about this ongoing crisis yet do nothing to stop it. Biden has ‘angry calls’ and apparently name calls Netenyahu yet does nothing about it. Optics for election year? or is it that true power to affect change lies elsewhere. Either way, the US can’t claim to be for peace and concerned about loss of life or call for ceasefire then veto it 4 times in 5 months at UN like a pariah state and a liability to world peace and harmony. The US tells Israel to ‘be careful’ in how they commit a plausible genocide whilst their military industrial complex loads the gun for them. Like a bad parent giving their unhinged child a bottle of wine and saying don’t do too much now little Timmy.

The fact that some nations (Japan and Netherlands) security export contractors are cutting ties and restricting trade of arms with Israel is telling of what the situation has devolved too. Even corporate entities that are notoriously amoral and don’t care for morals but mainly for material gain are sacrificing profits to protect themselves from being liable in a ‘plausible case for genocide.’ Whether they are putting justice before profit or not - the point is that even out of self interest they consider Israel’s actions after the ICJ ruling to be on the wrong side of history - a side of the bed they don’t want to be seen in rolling around with Israel which will face future prosecution.

Very well written. Centrism and claiming to be centrist can be a cowardly way to hide from more mentally taxing discussions. I wrote this elsewhere but feel it has relevance here. ''Mature rationality is not just understanding but discerning . The enlightened types like to be detached from the disputes and dichotomies of the common man, looking down at it all from a lofty place of transcendence. As Ram Dass said, part of awakening can be playing the role of form we are in - that is human. To be human, we've got to get down in the muck where the humanness is happening. Moral relativity is about understanding both sides but moral legitimacy is about determining and discerning the rightness of each side. Pluralism doesn't always mean neutralism. It's possible to see both sides of every contentious issue - that's a sign of intellectual maturity. But just because we can see both sides doesn’t mean we should live our life as though they both have equal merit. If we don’t further grapple with the rightness of each side we neglect a whole dimension of understanding by simply leaving it at “well I can see both sides which means both are equally right”. It’s good to understand that all concepts are relative and that none contain absolute truth, but this necessarily means that some concepts are more relatively truthful than others and by extension some actions are more relatively right than others. None of us live our lives as though all things are the same and all concepts are equally true - men can't have babies and I can't identify as something I'm not. We don’t drink bleach to wake us up, we order a coffee. When we want to go to somewhere we take a specific route, we don’t walk in a random direction and hope for manifestation to do its magic. Our daily choices reflect our reliance on relative truths as a fundamental aspect of our everyday life. I can understand why a robber had to rob to feed his family but I can still claim it not to be right. I can understand why Hamas did what they did and still claim it not to be right. I can understand why Israel feels entitled to the land of Palestine and still claim it not to be right. Where a rational society malfunctions compared to a irrational one is that it doesn't mature past the stage of understanding towards discernment. It rationalises in every direction and gets stuck at the subjective level playing the game of moral relativity. Like a windmill able to go in all directions and see all perspectives but which keeps us going round and round, dazed, dizzy and chaotic. Maybe what's needed is to graduate to also having discernment which implies a hierarchy of values and thus a compass to guide us towards betterment. Deciding our direction with the windmill of moral relativity and not a compass is what keeps society lost, disillusioned, incoherent and polarized with no transcendental logos to unify around. I feel this is one of the reasons a lot of people in the West are returning to religion or tradition as a way to feel anchored in something with direction. But, religion and tradition can too easily become shortcuts to thinking and turn dogmatic - as can liberalism - that all perspectives can freely exist and are fine so we don't have to wrestle with the tougher beast that is discerning which perspectives are better or worse.''

@Danioover9000 That Osho vid you shared earlier was very interesting to say the least. I read some where that its not just propaganda but atrocity propaganda which is a fitting term. The lies keep piling up. @Raze That bulldozer story is just horrifying, body literally exploding from the pressure. And then the flour massacre. So a captive population of which half are children are starved (to PrEssUre HaMaS bRo) and then when they run after the aid they are shot at? Then we're told the pressure is to release hostages when deals have been declined to release them for a ceasefire and truce? As if they want us to believe they care about the hostages so much that they bomb a tiny strip of land in which they are held hostage? What more does the world need to see and how can Zionists just revert to blaming Hamas for everything with a serious face.

Sirius report: ''Another moment of clarity as Russia once again makes the point very clear that NATO forces present in Ukraine would cross a major red line. Do not confuse the token elements from NATO countries present in Ukraine as constituting NATO forces already being present: Scholz stated that NATO and European countries will not send ground forces to Ukraine.''

Isn't it a logical contradiction for some Israeli's to say that Hamas are so savage they don't even care about their people suffering above ground - but then they think they can pressure Hamas to give up or agree to a hostage exchange by bringing about suffering to the people they fight for by restricting aid. If the view is that Hamas are so savage and don't care about their people, why then think that restricting aid and bombing innocent people would pressure Hamas while their immune from it underground? Besides strategy - it seems the whole conversation about it being morally abhorrent to collectively punish a people seems to be absent because its now become normalised after months of war crimes that the US keeps co-signing on and only paying lip service to the fact they are 'concerned' yet not doing anything tangible but instead continue vetoing ceasefires. Disgusting.

One would think it wrong not to speak on whats going on and share the suffering taking place - at least to show Israeli's a side they maybe aren't being shown on their media, or to illicit a reaction to their states actions being wrong. The common response is these are bad apples and cherries being picked, but for a small country with a small population it seems to be a awful lot of bad cherries being picked continuously for many months now. There seems to exist a deep systemic dehumanization that needs to be brought to light. For a country that is on trial for Genocide and under the watchful the eye of the world to continue their actions and also speak in genocidal ways signals something clearly wrong. The fact that the West is complicit in this should make everyone question where power lies and how the world really works. How can these 'cherries' not know they have a follow up ICJ hearing later this week: Only a culture that breeds entitlement and believes in its impunity can act out in such a way. The US raised a naughty child and this is the result of not being held to account for decades on end. @Nivsch The fact that you see Gideon Levy as extreme - is actually extreme to most Westerners. This shows that Israel doesn't have a political left any more, it only has a right, far right and extreme far right. The center of gravity has moved totally right at least in terms of foreign policy and attitude towards Palestinians. Israel being more LGBT friendly doesn't make it okay to just bomb a captive population of 2 million. American culture that contains twerk dancing and drag shows for children doesn't mean what they do beyond their borders is any good either. Whether it was a Western country or a Eastern one I would equally criticize both.

Insisting that Russia and China accept behavior from the US that the US would never accept from them is simply endorsing global subservience to the US empire. Those who suggest Russia should just accept Ukraine's NATO integration or that China should endure US military presence in the name of "freedom and democracy" essentially advocate for unchecked US influence worldwide - a uni-polar world, not a multi-polar one. They can approve of democracy - the rule of the people (ie more than one) within their country, but are against the existence of multiple powers globally co-existing. It's not that the US isn't a power or won't be (decline doesn't mean collapse), its that its no longer the only power on the world stage and needs to acclimate to this new reality. It can't just keep being a geopolitical titanic navigating the sea and expect other powers to remain 'contained' in dingy boats along side it being submerged by the waves it causes by its actions.

Everyone's making good points here. The conversations evolved to the macro of what political system is better but overlooks the possibility that a system can be more fair but less good. Further, it may be good in domestic politics but bad in foreign policy - one can criticize a countries foreign policy whilst admiring its more developed domestic policies and culture. A system is only made good by the agents within the system. Similar to Ken Wilbers state vs structure we can say a system is only made good or bad by the state of being/mind of those within it. Is a democracy that dictates beyond its borders better than a dictatorship only dictating within its borders? In other words it is democratic within its borders but dictatorial beyond them and is often found meddling, regime changing and causing chaos globally. Just this weekend Imran Khan in Pakistan won an election that is being rigged and contested by the army and corrupt opposition who are Western puppets and ousted him previously. He was imprisoned on flimsy charges and had previously come out on BBC and in other interviews stating the US interference and a coup took place on good authority - silence from the West. Is it really a good idea to meddle with the 5th most populated nuclear powered nation who is on a fault line with another nuclear powered nation (India)? All because Imran Khan was independent and clear that they will act independently in their own countries interest and not allow for a US base to be set up due to past troubles. We can look at human right abuses within less developed nations, but that doesn't absolve more developed nations from doing bad. A democracy isn't immune from corruption or plutocracy - these are just more intricately woven into the fabric of government and done with sophistication. Democracy means rule by the people for the people - the implication that this is superior is based on the assumption that you have a informed populace who know whats good for them over a ignorant one that don't - more informed than entertained. In a classical dictatorship the dictator is overt, out in the open, dictating everything top down. In a imperfect democracy that is a form of inverted dictatorship the dictators are in the shadows of corporate boardrooms and lobby groups who dictate policies not aligned to the people from within.

True, hard to tell if he would have taken more of Ukraine. It’s one thing to have the power to take territory, but another to have the staying power within a territory - especially against a population resistant to it which more of Western Ukraine would be. Holding the view that Ukraine doesn’t exist as a ‘sovereign’ state is dangerous. A similar parallel to this is when the extreme elements of the anti-Israel camp don’t recognise Israel to exist or that it shouldn’t. It’s one thing to have this view within yourself, it’s another to use this as a basis for action. Whether he acted on this view as the main catalyst for invading or it was just on the periphery and used to justify his actions after the fact is another. The US didn’t force this view on him, but they contributed to him acting upon it and using it as justification in retrospect - besides the other main reasons of a legitimate threat being on their border with NATO expansion. Besides 2014 and other factors leading up to it I’m guessing Putin seized this chance while the West is distracted with its own domestic issues and before the Russian population declines and ages to levels making it unfeasible to secure a territorial buffer zone in the future. RFK I’m guessing would have listened to Western analysts who weren’t given the spotlight due to imperial interests and not provoked the inevitable. Once war erupts it’s too late but it can be settled. Boris could have aided in peace but hindered it - this is well known in UK but is often lost in the flood of propaganda and deflection. @zurew You don’t have to agree with all the points someone makes. Even if you don’t like the messenger for whatever reason, if the message has some valid points it’s worth sharing.

Even a US court has ruled the findings of plausible case for Genocide as valid now. https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/01/genocide-gaza-israel-california-court

I think when criticising countries, the people of those countries get offended as they personalise it as an attack on them - but usually it’s that we’re referring to the few bad agents who run the show. Not like some monolithic conspiracy but just as a confluence of aligned elite interests. That's why people wonder why there’s very few politicians who do what’s long term and strategically good for their country. As Leo mentions above - these politicians are ‘mired in groupthink’ they wouldn’t admire otherwise had they the ability to step outside of it, and are beholden to financial and political survival by entities and people they don’t always hold the same views as but where personal interests align to create bad public outcomes. Strategy requires a long term vision that short term 4 years cycles keeps cutting. Maybe that’s a flaw that needs to be somehow addressed in the political system. Each different political party undoes the work of the previous one on areas they differ in policy. By the time the party gets the groove of running the nation they get bogged down in saying and doing things they wouldn’t otherwise and prepping for the next election cycle instead of focusing on running the country. Besides the parties, influence and power lies with private sector (corporatism). The strings they pull politically causes dissonance. For example, US politics see’s Russia as a boogeyman and a current threat to the West (Europe particularly) yet LNG exports have been halted from US who the ‘West’ (Europe) rely on to fuel their economies and military budgets against this threat of Russia. Surely, you wouldn’t cripple your European allies (Nordstream anyone?) during major war time with Russia who you deem so evil? The only way to squre that circle is either Biden catering to the environmentally minded base of support for the coming election or the private sector pulling strings to cripple European industry/competition and make Europe even more dependent on the US - or the convenient marriage of both. Thats why the contradiction and dissonance of our own nations sounding good but doing bad exists. Our documents say we’re good ( “human rights, democracy, freedom” ) but the conduct of our state is otherwise - good documents, bad deeds. The imperialist mindset comes from the frame that anyones freedom anywhere is a threat to their supremacy everywhere. Thats why the US can set up 800 global bases including surrounding (in their softened words “to contain”) the borders and seas of Russia and China and frame it as acceptable, but if the role was reversed (Chinese/Russian base in Mexico?) they’d call it a national security threat from a entity wishing to dominate. Even Westerners themselves now feel disillusioned from their nations claiming an Angelic nature written in the ink of charters which is then contradicted in action. Those nations that call this out or challenge it have to pay the blood price through wars, interventionist coups, sanctions and propaganda campaigns that demonise them - which only turns the world more hostile towards the West and isolates it

Powerful nations, including the United States, do not allow foreign military threats to accumulate on their borders. This is why many analysts and officials in the West had warned for years that NATO's actions could lead to conflict. Yet, when the war did break out, it was often portrayed in the media as an "unprovoked invasion," despite these earlier warnings. History always seems to start the very date the Western powers feel transgressed against and that a certain transgression occurs. The same way for Israel the current conflict started on October 7th and 'just occurred' in a vacuum. What is omitted is the escalatory amount of provocations that lead to the eruption of war. The other side is then gaslit for being war mongering when their own military industrial complex and vested imperial interests have been behind the scenes churning the gears of war through think tanks, propaganda and contracts. It’s crafty - pushing someone into a corner despite them explicitly saying what their red lines are, then pointing fingers at them and using mass propaganda to paint them as a boogeyman for trying to get out of that corner. A snapshot look at a situation will show who is the clear aggressor in that narrow slot of time (Hamas on October 7th and Russia invading) but it would leave out the Birds Eye view needed to shed light on the covert provocative nature of the instigators. It is human to condemn acts of violence, but it is wise to condemn the conditions that led to those very acts and to mitigate them.